Augmented Reality on Building Information Models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Augmented Reality (AR) is emerging as a technology with a multitude of applications in education and entertainment. In this paper, we discuss its potential in visualizing the information captured in Building Information Models (BIMs). To date, BIM-enabled applications have been limited to desktops running proprietary building-design software; cloud platforms, however, enable the usage allows for of BIM models through any device, including mobile ones. Therefore, AR applications can use the geometric information of the BIM models for accurate scene rendering and also for augmenting the scene with additional information relevant to different stakeholders. To demonstrate this concept, we have developed a mobile-application prototype. The application downloads a BIM model from a remote server and superimposes it on the camera feed. To ensure the modeled and real world objects are synced, image tracking is adopted as the localization technique. This provides the application user with the ability to move freely about the environment, which most previous research does not fully allow. Rather than simply displaying the model, BIM model properties are utilized so that certain aspects of the model can be hidden or displayed. This allows the user to focus on the objects that are important to their task. This feature distinguishes the application from most mainstream AR applications, and provides opportunities for future research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it